Corrigendum: A Quantitative Assessment of Factors Affecting the Technological Development and Adoption of Companion Diagnostics
- 1Department of Biological Basis of Behavior, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- 2The Oxford—University College London Centre for the Advancement of Sustainable Medical Innovation, The University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
- 3Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology, and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
- 4Kinapse, London, UK
- 5Oxford National Institute of Health Research, Biomedical Research Centre, Molecular Diagnostic Centre, Oxford University Hospitals, Oxford, UK
- 6Department of Biochemical Engineering, University College London, London, UK
- 7Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology, and Musculoskeletal Sciences, Botnar Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
- 8Sartorius Stedim, Göttingen, Germany
- 9The UCL School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, UK
- 10SENS Research Foundation, Mountainview, CA, USA
- 11Stem Cell and Cellular Therapeutics Operations at Stanford University Hospital and Clinic, California, CA, USA
- 12USCF-Stanford Center of Excellence in Regulatory Science and Innovation, California, CA, USA
- 13Centre for Behavioural Medicine, UCL School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, UK
- 14Harvard Stem Cell Institute, Cambridge, MA, USA
by Luo, D., Smith, J. A., Meadows, N. A., Schuh, A., Manescu, K. E., Bure, K., et al. (2015). Front. Genet. 6:357. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2015.00357
With regards to Figure 3: Significant relationships and non-significant relationships for CDx price, the graph (A) of CDx Price vs. CDx Sensitivity as well as the corresponding legend, is in error. Graph A wrongly depicts a trendline unadjusted for outlier effect, and the correct graph, as described in the text, is shown below. The corresponding legend has been likewise corrected to reflect the correct graph title and statistical values described in the text. This correction does not affect the scientific validity of the results, as the discrepancy was with the presentation of results.
Figure 3. Significant relationships and non-significant relationships for CDx price. (A) There is a significant relationship between CDx price and CDx sensitivity (R2 = −0.10, p = 0.04). (B) There are non-significant relationships between CDx price and drug price (R2 = 0.043, p = 0.70) and (C) the total patient population (R2 = 0.105 p = 0.59).
All authors listed, have made substantial, direct and intellectual contribution to the work, and approved it for publication.
Conflict of Interest Statement
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Keywords: companion diagnostic, combinational therapy, risk:benefit appraisal, healthcare risk management, personalized medicine, stratified medicine, healthcare translation, commercialization
Citation: Luo D, Smith JA, Meadows NA, Schuh A, Manescu KE, Bure K, Davies B, Horne R, Kope M, DiGiusto DL and Brindley DA (2016) Corrigendum: A Quantitative Assessment of Factors Affecting the Technological Development and Adoption of Companion Diagnostics. Front. Genet. 7:104. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2016.00104
Received: 22 April 2016; Accepted: 24 May 2016;
Published: 07 June 2016.
Edited and reviewed by: Alex Zhavoronkov, The Biogerontology Research Foundation, UK
Copyright © 2016 Luo, Smith, Meadows, Schuh, Manescu, Bure, Davies, Horne, Kope, DiGiusto and Brindley. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: David A. Brindley, email@example.com